WSP01884 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ 2 - Judge Stone :presided and opened the meeting wi th the explanation that the interim report is a;;basic plan for development of the Upper Colorado River Basin. The plan includes p~ovisions for regulatory storage reservoirs to enable the Upper " Basin to meet compa~t obligatiop.s at Lee F(lrry, Arizona, and make full use of the water allocated to ~t. Surplus revenues from power produced at these reservoirs is ';""."ilded to be used ,to assist il!lthe construction of participating irrigation proj- vets not othe~wise ~easible. ~;commented on the success of the f~lr preceding meetings and expres~ed gratifi~~~ion at the attendance by representatives of Utah PJld New MexicO at c4rtain of th~ meetings. i. ' Mr. Larson tll;en explain~d the project plan, emphasizing the probable neces- ,oity for holdover s~orage for periods of from 20 to 25 years. He stated that the ;;;i',rvoirs must be p)id for fr6m. power' revenues and that power market surveys indi- 'Jate that they mustJ:>e built pb,SSibly sooner than the necessity will occur for com- plete regulatory storage. He. qivided the program into three phases; (l) Selection of 9 reservoir, sites~ (2) Choosing of from 1 to 3 of those reservoirs to be initially constructe~, and (3) The authorization by Congress of a development aCGount from ex. cess p..ower revenues for participating projects. He stressed the fact onat since the. popul~tion of the Upper oasin is so small the power market will be from outside the nathral basin - probably in the Wasatch Front in Utah and on the Eastern slope"requiting construction of long transmission lines. He reminded the group that whatever ~nits may be selected for initial construction, there must be a practical plan. for m~keting the power produced. , . ~ Judge Stone etplained the steps required in the submission of reports of the Bureau of Reclamatio~, such as the one under consideration. As a preliminary step, this report has been';submitted to the States of the Upper Basin for informal com.. ~ents and suggestion$. FOllo\~ng this, the report may be revised in accordance',dth Ruch suggestions, ang then submitted to the Secretary of the Interior. Thence it is submitted to all the~States of the Colorado River Basin for their formal comments. If the report ~s notlthen revised to conform with the suggestion of any particular State, these comment~ must accompany the report when it is submitted to Congress for puthorization. . He a~ked for questions and comments from the assembly, after sugges- ting that info~matiod be given regarding actions taken at the preceding four meet- ings. Grand Mr. Breitenst~n gave a resume of the resolutions adopted at the Craig, Junction" Durazto, and Pueblo meetings. . ' .' Mr. Tipton eX!1~ained the reasons underlying actions. hich had been taken regarding the c'onstr1.13::tion of Glen Canyon dam. It is an excellent site and will ultimately come. into~he picture. From its construction, tremendous benefits would accrue to the Lower B~sin by virtue of increased power heads at Boulder Dam, and the retention of siiLt wllifh would ot;her~1ise enter Lower Basin reservoirs. The c/l.pacity of l5,ooo,oOO acre-~e~t resorved for silt retention at Glen Canyon would result in evaporation losses ovtr and above such losses incident to purely regulatory storage. These los!1es would beJ charged to the Upper Basin unless other provisions may be negotiated. Th~se ~a tors led to the resolutions s~gg(lsting the deferring of con- struction of Glen C . on. He emphasized that the project under discussion was one for both Eastern and .. estern Slopes, and that the Colorado-Big Thompson Project had a major interest in it,~due to the curtailment provisions in Senate Document 80. Future authorization acts fo~ transmountain diversions may oontain similar.provisions. . .